Joint physical
custody has lots of problems, and even when ordered, judges are often reluctant
to enforce it. Disagreements usually inure to the benefit of the mother in these
cases, and I have seen as many joint custody fathers get screwed as noncustodial
fathers. Most parents don't have money to litigate, and many litigate and go broke
fighting over custody. This is truly a disaster for the entire family, but it
happens way too frequently.

I have the answer:
the "time-shift shared parenting order". I have long pushed for a "time-shift
shared parenting order" (or in father's rights parlance, a "delayed gratification
order"). It gives primary custody to one parent until the halfway point from the
current time until the time the child goes to college. At this halfway point,
primary custody automatically flips to the other parent -- at a date specified
in the original divorce decree (no additional litigation necessary). So, if you
had two kids, ages 5 and 7, the 7 year old would go to the other parent when he/she
reaches the age of 7+ ((18-7)/2) = age 12 1/2. The other child would go to the
other parent at age 5+((18-5)/2) = 11 1/2. The exact date of custody transfer
will be written into the original decree so it is immediately enforceable without
litigation. If the judge we concerned about separating the children, he could
average those two ages to come up with a custody change when the oldest child
reaches age 12.

The time-shift shared parenting
order will work, and is easily saleable because:

1.
The parent who does not get "first shot" knows they will get their turn, and so
they don't feel totally devastated and robbed. We won't see so many dejected fathers
dropping out of society, quitting work, committing suicide, etc.

2.
Courts usually give custody to mothers because of adherence to the "tender years"
doctrine (whether legal or not, it is still as operative as ever because folks
believe that young kids need mothers). Under the time-shift shared parenting order,
we are more than happy to go along with the tender years doctrine (or any other
sort of belief), for we will get our turn too under the time-shift order.

3.
The time-shift order will tend to move custody of children to fathers when kids
get into their teen years, are harder to displine, when the male figure is most
important for bringing them to maturity, keeping daughers from getting preganant,
and sons from getting into trouble.

4. By
building it into the order, both parents are aware of what will happen in the
future, and can plan for it accordingly.

5.
By building it into the order, kids know what will happen and will be ready for
the transition when it comes. There is plenty of time to socialize the change,
so they are ready for it.

6. If one parent
moves away, it still does not affect the change of custody. It might be painful
for the kids and the noncustodial parent, but the other parent will get his turn.

7. The time-shift order avoids all possible
feminist objections and judicial concerns about parents "getting along". They
simply don't have a leg to stand on opposing it.

8.
It will greatly reduce perennial litigation. We simply won't have millions of
pariahed responsible parents who have no avenue but to keep litigating the custody
order.

9. When the wide body of studies are
invoked showing how fathers are better at dealing with teenagers, and saving society
from the wide variety of social problems, we have a real political and judicial
selling point.

10. In order for this to work
across state or jurisdictional lines, the original decree must state that if a
modification of custody is filed in another jurisdiction, the terms of the custody
modification must be made according to the custody statute of the original court
of jurisdiction. This prevents parents from moving to antifamily states and filing
for a custody modification. It is common in contracts to state terms of jurisdiction,
and there is no reason why we can't maintain statutory jurisdiction to ensure
consistency when parents move.